Objectives:

• Understand and explain the reciprocal relationships between community-level structures and group identity
• Analyze the roles and responsibilities of citizenship in community-level structures
• Understand the potential efficacy of and barriers to community-based programs to improve citizens' lives
• Analyze and assess how structuration theory can be used to identify, explain and respond to the needs, issues and problems that face communities today

Class Preparation

Turner 136-163. Please pay careful attention to pages 136-138 where Turner lays out the basic terminology and concepts of structural theories and also to 160-163 where he presents what he calls a "more simplified" conception of social structure. I actually find his conceptualization more useful and broadly applicapble than other presentations. The reading list for this week is really based more on materials that reflect Turner's ideas than those of Giddens. The description of network analysis is good, but I agree with Turner that by and large network analysts have focused on describing networks through mathematical models and that application of models to solving problems, issues and needs of communities has been very sparse.

Step 1: Your main preparation this week is to use the materials you have been gathering from the three think tanks that you are consulting. I hope you have developed a system for keeping track of the materials you have found interesting or helpful over the past six weeks. If you have tracked well, this should be an easy preparation. Identify several examples where key concepts of structural theory were used in the materials from your think tanks. These will probably be easy to find if you (1) look for examples where authors say that social structures are either part of the problem or the cuase of the problem of interest to you. A classic example is to point to "failure in public education" for a problem like limited social mobility -- e.g., not a good enough education to allow people to 'climb out of the poverty pit.' (2) Look at examples where the writer(s) calls for policy change. Most policy chnages focus directly or indirectly on social structures. The Jeb Bush approach to educational reform was a policy change. (3) Another way to think about this is to look at examples where a social structure or a network of structures are posited as potential solutions to a problem, issue or need. Nonprofit organizations are frequently cited as models for how to solve complex social problems, for example.

Step 2: Read ONE or TWO articles from the Week 8 Articles list, selections that are relevant to the problem, issue or need you have chosen to address this semester. Be prepared in class to explain the key concepts from structural theory that you found in the article(s) you chose to read. Ideally, these articles should be related to your PIN and tie to the materials from your think tanks. Overall, think tanks use theory but often do not specifically state the theoretical approach that undelies their "arguments" (not argument as in angry or disagreement, but in the sense of providing a logical explanation of something). My intent here is for you to first look at what you have from your think tanks and then consult the academic and research literature to gain deeper understanding of the theoretial concepts that the writer uses.

Step 3: Write a list of bullet points (one or two sentences long) providing examples from the materials in your think tanks of what appear to be theory-based arguments that reflect structural theoretical concepts. This list should focus on the examples that you found most interesting or useful to you personally. Limit the list to 1 or 1.5 pages total (not including references). Your list will provide a good starting point for Assignment 2 which is due on March 15. This procedure would work well for identifying the two very disparate theoretical approaches for that assignment and collecting the ideas (and references) you need to complete the assignment successfully.

AFTER CLASS follow up -- post by next class meeting

Step 4: Write a short (1 page maximum, single spaced, preferably more like one-half page) synthesis that provides an overall statement of your conclusions about the use of structural theory to explain your problem, issue or need, based on your understanding of the theory and the materials that you have found in your think tanks.

Step 5: Make one single document with the examples, the short synthesis, and a list of references (including references for each think tank material used. Post this document to the Week 8 Discussion Board. This does NOT have to be a long, elaborate document. The idea here is to "scope" what materials you already have and see how they fit within the stuctural theory framework.

Week 8 Articles

Additional Materials

Almudi, T. & Berkes, F. (2010) Barriers to empowerment: Fighting eviction for conservation in a southern Brazilian protected area. Local Environment 15(3), 217-232.

Beckfield, J. (2008). The dual world polity: Fragmentation and integration in the network of intergovernmental organizations. Social Problems 55(3), 419-442.

Bernard, P., Charafeddine, R., Frohlich, K.L., Daniel, M., Kestens, Y. & Potvin, L. (2007). Health inequalities and place: A theoretical conception of neighbourhood. Social Science & Medicine 65(9), 1839-1852.

Carbonnier, G. , Brugger, F. & Krause, J. (2011) Global and local policy responses to the resource trap. Global Governance 17(2), 247-264.

Choudry, Z. & Shragge, E. (2011) Disciplining dissent: NGOs and community organizations. Globalizations 8(4), 503-517.

Dangschat, J.S. (2009). Space matters -- marginalization and its places. International Journal of Urban & Regional Research 33(3), 835-340.

Glover, T.D., Stewart, W.P. & Gladdys, K. (2008). Social ethics of landscape change: Toward community-based land-use planning. Qualitative Inquiry 14(3), 384-401.

Goodkind, J.R., Ross-Toledo, K., John, S. et al. (2011) Rebuilding trust: A community, multiagency, state, and university partnership to improve behavioral health care for American Indian youth, their families and communities. Journal of Community Psychology 39(4), 452-477.

Holliday, A.L. & Dwyer, R.E. (2009). Suburban neighborhood poverty in U.S. metropolitan areas in 2000. City & Community 8(2), 155-176

Hosking, D. & Morley, I.E. (2004). Social constructionism in community and applied psychology. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 14, 318-331.

Jensen, L.A. (2012) Selves, societies, and social sciences: Pluralism in a changing global world. Theory & Psychology 22(3), 365-369.

Kidder, J.L. (2009). Appropriating the city: space, theory, and bike messengers. Theory & Society 38(3), 307-328.

Kusenbach, M. (2008). A hierarchy of urban communities: Observations on the nested character of place. City & Community 7(3), 225-249.

Lauster, N.T. (2010) Housing and the proper performance of American motherhood, 1940-2005. Housing Studies 25(4), 543-557.

Lee, J. & Macdonald, D. (2009). Rural young people and physical activity: Understanding participation through social theory. Sociology of Health & Illness 31(3), 360-374.

Manzo, L.C. & Perkins, D.D. (2006). Finding common ground: The importance of place attachment to community participation and planning. Journal of Planning Literature 20(4), 335-350.

Martinelli, A. (2003). Markets, governments, communities and global governance. International Sociology 18(2), 291-323.

Miller, C.M. & Blevins, A. (2005). Battlement Mesa: A case study of community evolution. The Social Science Journal 32, 1-12.

Murray, M. (2007) Cosmopolitans versus the locals: Community-based protest in the age of globalisation. Irish Journal of Sociology 16(2), 117-135.

Nelson, L. & Hiemstra, N. (2008). Latino immigrants and the renegotiation of place and belonging in small town America. Social & Cultural Geography 9(3), 319-342.

Parker, R. (2011) Grassroots activism, civil society mobilization, and the politics of the global HIV/AIDS epidemic. Brown Journal of World Affairs. 17(2), 21-37.

Raco, M. (2006). Reshaping spaces of local governance? Community strategies and the modernisation of local government in England. Environment & Planning C Government & Policy 24, 475-496.

Sinwell, L. (2008). Using Giddens's theory of "structuration" and Freirean philosophy to understand participation in the Alexandra Renewal Project. Development Southern Africa 25(3),

Stephens, S. (2007). Community as practice: Social representations of community and their implications for health promotion. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 17, 103-114.

Tusicisny, A. (2007). Security communities and their values: Taking masses seriously. International Political Science Review 28(4), 425-449.

Umbreit, M.S., Coates, R.B. & Vos, B. (2004). Restorative justice versus community justice: Clarifying a muddle or generating confusion? Contemporary Justice Review 7(1), 81-89.

Yanhcu, C.N. (2011) Gender differences in affective suffering among racial/ethnically diverse, community-dwelling elders. Ethnicity & Health 16(2), 167-184.